Two weeks ago, a high-level Israeli security delegation visited Washington and assured senior officials in the Trump administration that Israel would not carry out a strike on Iran as long as the United States remains engaged in negotiations over a new nuclear agreement with Tehran. With talks still ongoing, the rising tension in Israeli media and public discourse over a possible imminent Israeli or joint Israeli-American attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities appears unfounded.
The conversation over the past 24 hours between President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as a special security meeting convened Monday night at the Prime Minister’s Office, were focused on the Iranian nuclear issue. However, they appear to have been aimed at increasing pressure on Iran. It’s also possible that a naval operation carried out by the Israeli Navy in Yemen earlier that morning was part of the same strategy—to create a credible military threat ahead of the upcoming round of negotiations with Iran, led by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff.
2 View gallery
(Photos: Mandel Ngan / AFP, Mohammed Yassin/Reuters, Iranian Leader's Press Office, AP)
In previous rounds of talks, the United States proposed a framework agreement with Iran that included lifting some sanctions, but not all. Crucially, it demanded that Tehran halt uranium enrichment on its soil. Iran has already rejected that framework and said it would present its own counterproposal. However, it missed its own deadline for submitting that offer, possibly reflecting an internal struggle between hardliners and moderates within the regime.
Moderates, likely led by Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian, are reportedly pushing for compromise on uranium enrichment. Hardliners, as reflected in a public speech by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, reject any such concessions. “Who are you to tell us whether or not to enrich uranium?” he said, clearly addressing the American demand. Yet Khamenei, known for his cautious pragmatism, appears to have taken additional time to formulate a formal counteroffer.
Those hearing the roar of Israeli Air Force jets overhead may believe preparations for a strike on Iran are imminent, but they should not hold their collective breath, because until Washington declares the collapse of nuclear negotiations, Israel is not expected to act alone. This was the assurance given to the Trump administration by Minister for Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer, Mossad chief David Barnea, and National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi during their visit to Washington two weeks ago.
Trump: 'We're having very good talks with Iran. We'll see if that means anything'
According to Israeli sources speaking with Axios, the delegation made clear that Israel would not surprise the U.S. with a unilateral military operation. The three senior Israeli officials explained that, from Israel’s perspective, there’s no logic in launching a strike if a viable diplomatic solution is still possible—so Israel will give Washington a chance, even though many in Israel’s defense establishment doubt the final agreement will be sufficient from an Israeli standpoint. At best, it may limit Iran to low-level enrichment for several more years.
Israel’s pledge not to act as long as the US is negotiating eased American concerns. U.S. officials had viewed Israeli strikes in Yemen as live training exercises for a possible independent long-range strike on Iran. For President Trump, the current arrangement is convenient—Israel serves as a looming threat if talks break down.
For Israel, the stakes are high. A strike on Iran would require U.S. military support in at least three areas. First and foremost: defense. Israeli defense officials are certain that any attack—whether American or Israeli—will prompt a massive Iranian response, involving ballistic missiles, drones and cruise missiles.
Iran has hundreds of ballistic missiles, some equipped with maneuverable warheads that are difficult to intercept, along with thousands of drones and cruise missiles. Some are likely to bypass Israel’s air defense systems and could inflict significant damage on airports, infrastructure and civilian areas.
To mount an effective defense, Israel must coordinate with U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) and America’s Arab and European allies in the region, as it did during two operations in 2024. Without CENTCOM and its regional partners, Israel would struggle to withstand Iran’s likely days-long retaliatory barrage.
The second factor is the large scale of the attack, which would most likely lead to the overthrow of the regime. Israel can hit Iranian nuclear facilities with precision, but its capabilities are limited compared to those of the U.S. These facilities are buried deep under rock, and while Israel has experience in targeting such sites, the scope of damage it can inflict is limited.
The U.S., on the other hand, possesses heavy bunker-busting bombs, B-52 strategic bombers, and B-2 stealth aircraft capable of delivering massive payloads and maintaining strike momentum over several days. This matters, because even a successful strike will not eliminate Iran’s nuclear program permanently—Tehran could rebuild within years. But a joint Israeli-American strike might spark a popular uprising and lead to regime change, which intelligence officials in Israel and other regional countries believe could end the nuclear threat permanently.
The third factor is coordination: rescue operations, crisis management and diplomatic response—all areas where CENTCOM plays a crucial role.
All of this underscores why Israel cannot—and will not—act alone. It needs coordination with the U.S. not only to manage the Iranian response but also to handle the inevitable international fallout, including potential UN condemnations and new sanctions. The Trump administration is expected to help contain those reactions.
In return for restraint, Israel secured a U.S. commitment to military and political coordination if both countries decide diplomacy has failed. President Trump already accused Iran a week ago of stalling and failing to respond to the American offer. The deadline he set for reaching an agreement expires next week.
Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency recently reported that Iran possesses 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%—enough for roughly 10 nuclear bombs, with the first potentially ready in two to three weeks.
This intelligence adds urgency to the negotiations and has raised concerns in Israel’s defense community that Iran could make a breakout toward nuclear capability with little to no warning. As such, the IDF continues preparing for a potential strike. The Navy’s operation in Yemen was likely meant to signal to Iran that Israeli strike capabilities extend beyond airpower and include naval reach as well.
For now, talks with the U.S. continue—and there is little reason to panic prematurely.
